Campaigns and Democratic Choice

By Ronald Meinardus

Ideally, an electoral campaign in a democracy offers political orientation and gives the voter the chance to study the available alternatives before deciding which of the options is most compatible with his or her individual preferences and interests. In this sense, electoral campaigns should be exercises in political education. This, I confess, happens in an ideal world. In most countries, the reality is different. Instead of informing the public, political candidates frequently manipulate the truth. It has become a common practice that candidates make promises they know they can never fulfill. Unfulfilled promises are a major cause for a lack of popular confidence in the political leadership; broken promises also help explain the widespread disenchantment with the electoral process and democratic institutions in many countries.

Political campaigns vary from country to country. The way politicians pursue the votes depends on a range of variables such as political institutions and traditions, economic and social conditions, as well as cultural and technological factors. “No other area of politics has so drastically changed over the last few decades than the manner in which candidates pursue votes,” write Daniel M. Shea and Michael John Burton in their study on “Campaign Craft” in the United States. While changes regarding the methods and techniques of political campaigning may not have been as sweeping in other countries, the related developments in America have had a strong impact on the manner elections are fought in many parts of the world.

Economic development and technological progress largely determine the way societies communicate and the quality of their respective mass media. The proliferation of radio, as well as television and the Internet have had (and continue to have) major implications on how politicians and political parties organize their vote-getting strategies. The most significant technological development in the field of political communication has been the proliferation of television. In an international comparison of political campaigns, the ever-growing importance of TV is the most important similarity. Television brings together voice and visual images, which gives it a persuasive power that outreaches radio and newspapers.

The dominance of television in political campaigns is a global phenomenon with far-reaching consequences. In many countries, television has become a dominant political player in the democratic equation as a whole. One example of television’s extraordinary power is seen in the Philippines, which is gearing up for hotly contested elections next month. Filipino columnists lament that the electoral process in their country has degenerated into “celebrity politics” where film studios and TV channels have replaced the political parties as recruitment grounds for candidates, and where TV shows and paid advertisement are increasingly shaping voters’ attitudes. “Politics in the Philippines has become an extension of show business and broadcast journalism,” says Marites Vitug, editor of a political magazine in Manila.

With maximum media publicity as the key to electoral success in many countries, political campaigns have also become more costly. This in turn has forced candidates to raise more money making them more dependent on wealthy sponsors.

All over the world, electoral campaigns have not only become more expensive, they have also become more professional. Today, in most countries no serious candidate for national office can do without the assistance of expert help: “While candidates are ultimately responsible for their campaigns, there is no way they can compete, let alone win, without professional help,” says Dennis W. Johnson, the author of “No Place for Amateurs. How Political Consultants are Reshaping American Democracy.” With some 3000 firms specializing in campaigns and elections, the United States is doubtlessly the country with the highest degree of campaign-related professionalism. At the same time, the strategies, tactics and techniques applied by political consultants in America’s electoral battles have found their way into electoral campaign arsenals in other countries. All over the world, politicians running for important posts and political parties aspiring power utilize campaign-related “know how” that originated in the United States: message and strategy development, software supported telephone technology, demographic voter databases, geo mapping and advanced targeting techniques are just some modern political marketing tools utilized by campaigners all over the world.

“Campaign operatives worldwide are fascinated by the professionalism of election campaigns in the United States, and increasingly American consultants offer their services worldwide,” says Louis Perron, a political consultant from Switzerland, in a paper entitled “Can American political campaigning techniques be transferred to Asian countries?” Speaking to a group of Filipino politicians in Manila, Perron answered this question in the affirmative and cited several examples of American consultants working successfully in South East Asian election campaigns with the Philippines being the most fertile ground. Still, there are limits and a downside to the “Americanization” of political campaigns, one being the high costs the consultants charge, the other the necessity for local adaptation of the foreign rules. My personal impression from surveying election campaigns in several East Asian countries is that the candidates and parties do indeed utilize political techniques from the United States; but in most cases they refrain from buying the costly expertise of flown-in American consultants.

Apart from the commercial implications some modern campaign techniques also influence the relationship between the candidates and the voters_and this, I would argue, in a negative fashion. With the proliferation of television the voters have become passive spectators rather than participants in debates. While in many countries political strategists still insist on organizing political rallies, these have basically become well-designed media events. In some countries, and the Philippines again may be cited as an extreme example, the dividing line between political information and entertainment is blurred. The voters are relegated to onlookers; they are offered sound-bytes instead of clear answers as to how the candidate intends to address the challenges of the future. Unfortunately, today many political strategists deliberately ignore the most important democratic function of campaigns_to prepare the voters for participation and choice.

Dr. Ronald Meinardus was the former Resident Representative of the Friedrich Naumann Foundation in the Philippines and will leave Manila late September for a new posting in the Middle East. He writes a blog at www.myliberaltimes.com